Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
ups and downs. at the debate last night, they fact-checked obama on the $5 trillion deficit, which was truly the romney mendacity -- on romney's front, i forget what they were fact checking but it was much more serious. you need voices inside and outside the democratic party, citizens of conscience, to call out when they hear the media not getting to the bottom of the issue. our media, let's be honest, has treated the campaign as a horse race. look at the debate. as i mentioned earlier, it was treated more like a theater performance than actually grappling with the substance. president obama, if you look of the coverage, i'm sure 92% of it had more to do with how disengaged he was than the actual substance. that is not helping for a country that prides itself on being a democracy with engaged and knowledgeable citizens. host: we are almost out of time. i will try to get two students in. guest: i will be brief. host: bolivia is a political science major. >> my question has to do with the rhetoric involving "the war on women" and the recent article he wrote. is it fair to classify wo
opportunities for governor of your president obama to score political points at the upcoming debates and what that argument might some light on these issues? is there any earthly chance either of them would try to do something like that? >> the only case that has gotten on to the radar the broader public would be health care. i think it would be a reference back. because the economy takes the economy -- takes the oxygen out of the election in relation to foreign affairs, this just does not pay -- does not play among independent and undecided voters. you want this person to replace justice ginsburg went she retires. if you want to know if there's any practical consequence, it would be the point that the obama administration has declined to defend the defense of marriage act. president romney might well decide that he would defend the constitutionality of that statute. but it does not seem that kind of social conservative question has a lot of civilians in something like a presidential debate. other than health care, i can't see much happening. >> i think it will not happen. here is why. no maj
to obama. we're going to talk with her about that but also starting point is few days after this debate, where do you think the presidential race is right now? >> i think mitt romney is looking very good. that's why the obama administration didn't want to run against mitt romney. he was clearly the most threatening of the republican candidates. i think he's the strongest candidate against obama. it's hard to take out an incumbent. republicans have only done it one time before in the last 100 years. when reagan beat carter. i guess isn't the last time it's happened when clinton took out bush, right? so it's curious, for example that there were 70 million viewers of that debate the other night, the highest it's been since 1992, the last time an incumbent was taken out. i think that's because people are uncomfortable with obama but if they're not political nuts, like we are, they haven't been paying attention, haven't been watching all the debates and they just want to see who the challenger is and whether they're comfortable with him. and i think after wednesday night, everyone's pretty c
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3